Slashdot Mirror
RFID Coming 'Whether You Like It Or Not'
VTBassMatt writes "According to an interview with Scott McGregor of Philips Semiconductor in BusinessWeek, RFID tags are coming whether we like it or not but of course won't affect our privacy. Choice quotes from the article include such gems as, '[P]rivacy concerns around RFID tags are a little like concerns about supermarket scanners years ago. When the laser scanners were coming out, everybody was saying, retailers are going to collect information about what you buy. And none of that happened.' Is that why I have two loyalty cards on my keyring and three more in my wallet?"
Walmart demanded barcodes from the manufacturers and now they are demanding rfid tags. Walmar now controls almost half the US retail sales. Can't really blame them. The ultimate in real-time inventory and the manhours saved will practically pay for the program. We'll all have to start wearing RFID blockers.
"God fights on the side with the best artillery." - Napoleon, Marshal of France - speaking truth to power
I refuse to participate. For the most part, I buy food from our local small business, but if I absolutely have to go to one of the megachains that practically require their "loyalty cards" to avoid being ripped off, I take the following precautions:
1. I pay in cash only.
2. I fill out a form for a new card (even if I don't need it) and then throw the card away as I'm leaving. I don't fill out any of the information.
3. If a clerk gives me a hassle, I just look at them, smile, and say: "This is a conversation between me and your employer. I am trying to leave you out of it. If you would like to involve yourself in the conversation, that's fine, but I think you would rather not."
Step three usually gets the occasional nag to shut up very quickly and let me do my thing.
I figure eventually this has to end up costing them something - if everybody did that, instead of doing the sheeple thing and sticking with one card, I think that the stores would eventually give up on those damn cards.
InThane
As many things in life, we (the public) could easily stop this if there was a public outcry against it. However most people either don't know the risks or don't care. People won't boycott stores that use RFID tags, they'll just complan here on slashdot.
The real question is whether we'll actually see a benefit to the introduction of RFID-- ie, actually keeping things stocked that I *want*, particularly sale items. I could certainly see some potential disadvantages, like if sale items start selling faster than they expect. Maybe an alert will be flagged and they'll mysteriously pull the remaining stock off the shelves...
All in all, I guess I can't really see any huge problem with the technology, though, as far as privacy is concerned-- that is, as long as it stays on the products themselves. If they suddenly start requiring RFIDs in the shopper cards so they know when I enter or leave the store, then I might have a concern.
KappaStone
Hmmm... maybe I'm missing some point... Am I?
Over here in the US of A, I think the situation will be a little different. Walmart likes RFID. Their investment will be plenty to get the whole industry up and running pretty quickly. And that will also lower costs for smaller businesses to implement them.
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
.. and using it against you. There's been tons of examples. The one that made the most press was about the guy who slipped and fell on some broken glass & liquit, and broke his hip. He sued the supermarket.
... Besides, why a discount card with a unique ID? What was so wrong with coupons? Why do they have to have a unique ID and log everything that you shop? You can't have the discount unless you tell us your name, address, phone, SS# or drivers license? Bullshit.
The supermarket pulled up the guys shopping records over the last year or so. It turned out that he bought only alcohol 90% of the time while in the story. They defense team implied that he was an alcoholic and was drunk at the time, and that was why he fell, not because of the glass & liquid on the floor.
That's just one example. There are many, many more.
What is your privacy worth to you? $0.30 off a 2 liter bottle of coke? Good for you. My privacy is much more valuable to me, which is why I avoid the discount cards.
WHY CAN'T I HAVE MY DISCOUNT WITHOUT YOU KNOWING WHO I AM?
Is that why I have two loyalty cards on my keyring and three more in my wallet?
Yeah, don't get me started on "rewards cards" -- I'm carrying two on my keyring as well. There's no reward to those cards. Basically, the supermarkets have decided that unless you become one of the sheep, and carry around their silly cards so they can track your purchases, they won't let you purchase anything on sale.
Which would be fine with me. I'd be happy to take my business elsewhere. Except there is no elsewhere when it comes to supermarkets. They all have "rewards cards" now. So it's either let them track all your purchases, or pay a steep penalty by being excluded from sale items. The same thing's gonna happen with RFID. There will be no place you can go to avoid them.
Except, that is, your local co-op, and similar small-scale businesses. I happen to buy most of my groceries at the co-op just because the prices are comparable, the food is grown closer to me, the politics are better, and I know I'm not getting tracked. Unfortunately, I doubt that enough people care about their privacy for an anti-RFID movement to emerge.
I'm generally "Interesting," "Insightful," and even "Funny" here. What the hell happens to me at parties?
RFID still has a potential to be used for tracking, and I think that's what will continue to make a lot of people nervous/paranoid.
With a UPC, there's a limited number (10^12) of possibilities, you can tell what information it contains and compare between things--even if the numbers aren't there, it's not too difficult to figure them out from the bar code pattern--and you can tell when it is being scanned.
With RFID, there's a potential for transmitting much more information, the information can't be read/compared without a scanner, and it's easy to scan without anyone knowing.
I think that if legislation was passed saying what uses of RFID should be legal and what should not, a lot less people would be worried about it.
Karma: Negative (Mostly affected by dorm trolling)
According to my experience with loyalty (of the buy 3 for $10 with the card, or else one is $5) cards in the US (I'm originally from Europe), a good rule of thumb to know if a grocery supermarket chain is any good is to see if it has a loyalty card program. All those that have one are not good, and most of those that don't are a good place to shop for food (whether they're cheaper like Winco, or they taste better like Whole Foods).
Is that by refusing to purchase items with RFID tags, that you would be forced into "second class" citizenry. Rather than have the items that you would like to, you would have to buy more expensive downgraded products. Perhaps reasonably, stores will say that adding the RFID tag lowers store costs and product costs, and therefor by not buying RFID implanted objects, you will be choosing to pay more, lest the majority subsidize you. I'm not sure I buy that, as the added savings, or revenue, the stores see will most likely end up in the pockets of executives, not shareholders, employees, or customers.
Store loyalty cards are used to track the purchases of the cardholder, but most stores only use the addresses on file to send snail-mail spam. The solution? Use a fake name and address. You get the discounts, and no one knows who you really are.
RFID can be implemented by retailers without affecting the customer's privacy.
The simple solution is not to embed the tag within the garment but for the tag takes the form of a label that is removed at the point of sale
The retailer gets full advantage of the tags within their stock chain.
The purchaser has no privacy issues.
Additionally the retailer also has the advantage that the tag can be reused.
slashnik
If you write checks, you give up your privacy anyway. Your check contains your name, address, phone number, bank name and routing number, your account number, your social security number (sometimes). If I had to pay by check, the last thing I'd be concerned about is the fact that someone could find out that I bought twinkies and milk at the same time.
the cards don't cost jack compared to the revenue generated by the information.
If the vast majority of consumers stopped using them- the loss in revenue might kill the program but not the cost of the cards. That's like thinking you can drive them out of business by grabbing and extra plastic bag with each visist.
It's hard to believe that's how Micronians are made. Why don't we see it right now by having you both kiss one another?
They are indeed coming and it really is just a matter of price..
WalMart, etc. cannot wait for these. And actually I think the military might be a prime driver of wide scale adoption. The real trick is to get the cost down to pennies.
The huge cost savings will be in inventory. Imagine either enough readers in your warehouse to scan every location, OR a robot that drives around at night pinging RFID tags. Imagine being able to just push your cart through a metal detector & have everything scanned in seconds.
Also some RFID will have non-volatile memory and be able to record events or travels or born-on dates. For an extra $5 you can have a tamper-proof record of a packages travel. Or for $20 maybe a gps chip on board to record the shipment so audit it when it gets to where it is going.
I think the first place we'll see them will be as a new shopper card. You'll get a keychain (like the gas pump thingy) that will identify you at upscale stores or maybe even print out a shopping list for you when you enter the grocery store. Stores will want this because they can secretly track who looks at what items and for how long. Then they sell that information back to producers and marketing folks.
I had an interview with a company that supplies Wal-Mart with baked goods, and the interviewer mentioned that they were going to have to get ready for RFID because of them. He said "When a gorilla like Wal-Mart says jump, you jump."
William of Ockham had no beard. The most likely explanation is that it was chewed off by squirrels every morning.
Walmart won't offer crap. Take UCCNet for instance, they forced all their suppliers to spend thousands of dollars for registration, and now thousands of dollars in infrastructure updates/man hours to implement the global data sync (So far it's cost us about 20k and we haven't even started with implementing automatic changes). Walmart is the only big winner on this, since they are saving MILLIONS of dollars while refusing to accept a cost increase to offset the financial constraints forced on the supplier. The same thing is going to happen with RFID.
What is needed for the RFID to flourish, and to be accepted for widespread adoption (which would cheapen it through economy of scale) is ironclad legislation that covers these three simple points:
RFID shall only be used against white lists of your own property. Any other reading must be discarded.
RFID shall be prominently labeled, and be removable without destruction, devaluation or vandalism to the item that is attached to. For example, someone here asked, why not just cot off the tag? Answer is that some clothing is now coming tagless.
Warranties shall not require RFID tags in order to be upheld.
RFID is good technology, let's not let it's overwhelming potential for abuse become an issue.
Loyalty cards are little more than a tax on your privacy, imposed by the business, with the government's active consent.
Or, from another perspective, loyalty cards are titles of nobility, granted after you have "proven" yourself worthy of special treatment. Instead of the government bestowing the titles and getting the support from said noble, it's the business.
Sure, I can still buy stuff without a loyalty card. I can also get into Windsor Castle, once I pay the tour guide. At least you know that you're not Queen Elizabeth. Do you know how retailers are using your information? How certain are you of the degree of privacy you have surrendered?
The lethal combination of loyalty cards and RFID, is that, not only can the store (and whatever cracker can break the database password) tie you to the Super-Gonzo Food Processor 30K that you bought last week, but they can actually pinpoint the serial number of the unit you purchased. A barcode doesn't carry that much information.
Have the manufacturers and retailers been forthcoming with this information? Their silence on the matter is most telling, I'd say.
Loyalty cards are your choice, and you can still buy stuff without them.
But it may be choice few low income families can afford.
If you are rich, you can afford to have privacy.
"Only one thing, is impossible for god: to find any sense in any copyright law on the planet." Mark Twain
"The huge cost savings will be in inventory. Imagine either enough readers in your warehouse to scan every location, OR a robot that drives around at night pinging RFID tags. Imagine being able to just push your cart through a metal detector & have everything scanned in seconds. "
Imagine all the low wage "I'm here because of the economy" jobs lost. The same for those automated checkout lines. The worker is being squeezed between a rock and a hard place. Outsourcing, insourcing, technology increasing productivity reducing need for workers. Soon there will be nothing left.
Sadly, Americans are pretty bad about voting their consciences with their dollars. That's why Wal-Mart does so well to begin with. They know, at least abstractly, that Wal-Mart is Bad and Wrong. But when they they want to buy a shower curtain they'd rather buy it for $7.95 at Wal-Mart than $12.99 at the local design store.
The problem, unfortunately, is pervasiveness. I don't think anybody much cares whether somebody is tracking their Aggressive Sports gear or not, so they buy it where it's cheap. They do care, in the abstract, about the idea that somebody is tracking _all_ of their purchases, but somehow that doesn't translate down to each individual action.
In addition, many people are of the mind that they're not doing anything wrong, so why not allow yourself to be tracked? They'd rather save a few bucks today than worry about an ill-defined threat in the future. Short-term thinking, I know, but it's really, really hard to stop.
Also, privacy concerns around RFID tags are a little like concerns about supermarket scanners years ago. When the laser scanners were coming out, everybody was saying, retailers are going to collect information about what you buy. And none of that happened. I think the situation with RFID is similar.
Retailers DO collect info about what you buy, corps like WalMart and Target have huge datamining efforts to figure out what they should place near other items in the store based on buying patterns
You start a new job for a manager that you know nothing about in a large company. You notice that the last two or three people who worked for your new manager left but those topics of discussion are casually dropped whenever they're brought up. You don't want to press the issue.
You notice that any day you use your debit card tied to your bank account with the companies' credit union and the last transaction indicates that you stayed out late results in your manager being extra mindful of what time you come to the office the next day and he's also extra mindful of exactly what time you leave. These days frequently become the days in which he needs you to stay later or is more likely to make a comment that you were in at 8:45 am and not 8:30 am. Official company starting time is still 9:00 am but the whole situation provides more tension.
Privacy is never an issue until someone violates it. The fact is you'll never be able to prove how they violated it because the information likely went through three or four priveleged sources who have been indoctrinated with the corporate "management knows best, keep your mouth SHUT" policy.
+++ATHZ 99:5:80
Yes, it will lower costs for smaller business to implement them, because there won't be any small businesses left to implement them.
Discount for loyalty card == surcharge for no loyalty card.
And coupons for things that they want you to start buying. Do you really think they're doing you a favour? There's no way they are making a loss on "sale" prices, so the more generous-looking the offer, the more they're screwing you by default.
If they have a similar product to something I'm already buying, I might check it out. I'm not going to buy it simply because I have a cupon for it. The only things I ever recall getting cupons for which I did not buy are gas discounts.
It doesn't take an Einstein to work out that the end result is to phase out the cheap, low margin, staples that the lower income bracket depend on in favour of Haagen-Daaz and Organic Cider.
It also doesn't take a huge database system and supermarket cards to implement what you are discussing here. And, if your theory was correct, every grocery store would have turned into a boutique, only offering quaint, premium-brand foods.
Almost everything I buy is FMV or Kroger brand (which isn't being phased out at all, at least not at the supermarket near my house), and I'm damn happy with it. C'mon, get with the program here.
"Quoting famous computer scientists out of context is the root of all evil (or at least most of it) in programming." - K
I agree - if this happens, I move to Tonga.
What bothers me is that the RFID tags are about the size of a flake of pepper. This makes it really easy for a less-than-honest business (and isn't the U.S. just doing a wonderful job of showing the world what "honest business" means nowadays . . .) to ignore the proposed RFID labelling law and bury the damn things inside the lining of a shirt. Short of carrying an RFID jammer everywhere - and I ain't seen any yet - there's little to no defense against the intrusion or tracking.
I'm not tense. I'm just terribly, terribly, alert.
The loyalty cards are not really the same as RFID.
RFID can be used to track items purchased, but really don't have a direct way to tie that information back to an individual consumer (assuming you don't give them the information in another way). A lot of stores have ways of doing this anyway and have for a very long time. Keeping track of what sells help keep your prices down by reducing overhead and helps make sure things are reordered promptly. There isn't a large difference between keeping track of what is sold and keeping track of the IP addresses tha access a web page and where they came from.
Consumer loyalty cards are very different. They track by individual user. A store might know that I like to buy a certain brand of cereal and use that information to increase their revenue by either targeting me in a marketing campaign or by selling the data to another company. Every loyalty program I've ever seen are voluntary except for private bulk stores (like SAMS CLUB or COSTCO). You are getting the discount in agreement that the store can use your information. If you don't agree, you can't complain about not getting a discount because they are not makinge money from you. Lower income families are more likely to use this, but their information is also less likely to be useful because of the lower discretionary income. There are also numerous ways around these cards and several people have commented on them.
There is also the option of not shopping at RFID or loyalty cards stores. Don't be angry when you have to pay more. Businesses are designed to make money. They use any legal means to do this function. While the ethics of this may be questionable, it is not currently illegal. If a store says that they'll give you a discount in exchange for marketing information, competing businesses may be put at a disadvantage because the primary shopping habit of people is based on price, not privacy.
If these RFID devices are designed to be disabled (as the current RF security tags are), then it should be an easy matter to disable thousands of tags at a pop.
The current RF security tags (RF, not magnetic or accoustic tags) work via a passive or sympathetic action. The security sensors at the store exits transmit a low power RF signal. The RF tag receives this signal, which is converted to a weak electrical charge, which in turn powers a small transmitter. If the security scanner detects a signal on the RF tag's output frequency then it sounds the alarm. To disable a tag, a signal is broadcast at the same frequency as the "input" frequency of the RF tag, except the signal strength is so strong it burns up the tag (or more specifically burns out a specific fuse-like weak link in the tag).
So my point is that RFID tags also have to be powered externally by an RF signal - they are the same as RF security tags except their output signal is modulated to include static data. If someone had equipment set up, say in their vehicle, to broadcast at a few hundred watts (or perhaps thousands of watts in a short burst), they could potentially burn out quite a few tags in the store.
I'm somewhat surprised no one is doing this currently with the RF security tags.
Dan East
Better known as 318230.
I don't think its a bad thing to use RFID to track products for inventory. The article went deeper than that.
They were talking about putting RFID in cell phones or key chains and such. Using the tag to hold ALL of your personal data such as medical records, drivers licence, credit card and even car key.
Not once did the "reporter" (not) ask "what happens when you lose your cell phone with all your info stored in it?"
Identity theft is what makes me think twice about ever using devices like this.
Some seem to think that you're jumping on a bandwagon of "smart" people.
Some think you're being presumptious by lumping yourself with "smart" people.
Some just get all mad when someone says they believe in God.
I think, though, that they are a little unnerved by the fact that all these great, objective, scientific minds arrived at the conclusion that a god exists. This either means they have to wonder what these "great minds" were smoking or what they themselves are smoking to not see it.
Disclaimer: I myself am in the "Everything I have seen leads me to believe in God" camp of thought. If you want to know more of how people can *gasp* actually arrive at this conclusion, I'm sure myself or Doesn't_Comment_Code will be happy to entertain any legitimate conversation.
"There are a dozen opinions on a matter until you know the truth. Then there is only one." - CS Lewis (paraprhase)
You know, I actually don't really have a problem with this ... except that because we're relying on information that's "in the computer," there's a risk that information will be categorized as somehow more "infallible" than other information in the eyes of a jury.
... it's the computer records being submitted and tagged into evidence. I can picture eldery jurors sitting there thinking: "Well, it's the computer. They've got all the records right there. It says he bought beer all these times. Must be true. Computer wouldn't lie -- it's a machine!" (Yet, as we all know ... lies, damn lies, and statistics, and all that.)
For example, this case would be no different if it were a small mom-and-pop grocery in a one-horse town somewhere. Except in that case, it would be the clerk who always sees the customer buying beer who gives the testimony in court. The jury would then have to decide: Is this accurate testimony? Is the witness biased? Is the testimony complete? Is he hiding other information?
In Safeway's case it's not an eyewitness giving spoken testimony on the stand
Breakfast served all day!
When they're broke - everybody. Sure their selection sucks ass, and most of their merchandise is shoddy, but they are cheap cheap cheap!
When I can afford to shop anywhere else I do. When I got $15 to last 2 weeks, I shop at Wal-Mart.
They will never stop until somebody makes the
OK, so we know that stores are tracking your purchases. My question: So what?
On the pro side:
You get targetted coupons
Stores get superior inventory flow management. This allows them to cut costs. This may result in: lower cost product, higher wages to employees, higher bonuses to bigwigs. None of those are horrible things.
On the con side:
"They" are "watching" me.
Will someone explain to me why the hell a store cares how many bottles of preparation-H you buy, other than to make sure they stock enough to meet demand? To what nefarious purposes are they going to put this info?
I'm limiting this to barcodes/loyalty cards. I'm well aware of the Minority-Report-esque possibilities of RFID outside the store.
It doesn't take an Einstein to work out that the end result is to phase out the cheap, low margin, staples that the lower income bracket depend on
And, this explains the utter failure of WalMart and the stunning success of Bread and Circuses.
Oh just wait. You can bet law enforcement will find all kinds of neat-o keen uses for RFID technology. For instance, every felon getting one subdermally courtesy of the US government!
They will never stop until somebody makes the
Don't but(sic) it if you can't afford it.
I have no idea which "clothing and home items" the parent-poster was referring to, but if they are underwear and laundry detergent (or items like this) "don't buy it if you can't afford it" is not a viable option. Maybe you can afford a $400,000 home and drive a BMW but for many people when faced with the choice of paying $30 a pair for boxer shorts at the mall or a pack of 5 for $10 at wal-mart, they'll take wal-mart any day of the week.
Today I didn't even have to use my AK; I got to say it was a good day -- Icecube
Exactly!
Some of the stuff can even be desirable:
Fewer out-of-stock products
Lower overhead -> lower price
Targetted advertising is better than being innundated... and you may even save some money on the sale price of something you were already going to buy
Convenience
Just like a steak knife or dynomite - depends how you use it.
Slashdot Syndrome: the sudden, extreme urge to correct someone in order to validate one's self.
That's *exactly* what he's doing. He said he can't afford the prices at the deparment stores, so he doesn't buy their stuff. Prices at Wal-mart are within his grasp however, so he does buy their stuff. What it seems like you're saying is that if you can't afford to buy something at an expensive store, then you should not buy it at all, even though you can afford it elsewhere. I'm sorrry, but that is just ridiculous.
"The stores forced them on you? They refuse to take your money unless you have one? It is impossible for you to take your business elsewhere?"
They jack the price up, then discount it to regular rates only if you play your part in the game. It's not really a privacy problem, but I prefer positive rewards for being a market research subject, not negative reinforcement for NOT being a research volunteer, get it?
-fb Everything not expressly forbidden is now mandatory.
Your faith is YOUR faith. Keep it to yourself and people won't get pissed. Your faith has no place in other people's lives. Stop trying to inject it into the conversation. Stop trying to inject it into the law. No one likes having someone else's beliefs pushed on them.
Faith is like sexuality. It makes great art. Let others discover it for themselves. And please keep it behind closed doors. For non-theists, this applies to the absence of faith as well. It's not for public display or debate. No matter how hard you try, you can't prove that you're right. It all comes down to faith.
Walmart DOES abuse their powers. They require their suppliers to decrease cost each year or be cut out regardless of contract. They have locked in employees at night with no way to get out (managers have keys, but are not there). They have forced employees on salary to clock in and out, and then dock them pay for being gone and not pay overtime when they are there in excess of 40 hours...often at night. While they may not purposefully price things to force competition out, by being as large as they are and their actions with suppliers (remember they force lower prices from the suppliers), they are in effect the MicroSoft of retail. This is just a small list of their actions.
Others have already pointed out that the so-called "discounts" offered by loyalty cards really aren't. You're supposed to think that you're getting a discount off the regular price if you use your loyalty card, when the reality is that you're paying a higher-than-standard price if you don't use a loyalty card.
It reminds me of mail-in rebates. Someone not long ago -- I think it was Ed Foster, in his column "The Gripe Line", but I don't remember for sure -- pointed out that when D-Link or whoever offers you a $30 "mail-in rebate" on that WiFi router, they don't actually want to give you a lower price -- if they did, they'd just mark the price down. What they're hoping is that people will be drawn into the store by the lure of the so-called "discount price", buy the router, then decide it's too much of a hassle to fill out all the forms, mail them, and wait six to eight weeks for the check. It's a rather deceptive marketing practice, just like loyalty cards are.
That's what Christianity is really all about, isn't it?
.. right?
... it would just put a damper on your emotional rapture of "the majesty of creation"!
If enough apparently intelligent, well-meaning people believe in it, then it must be true!
It appears to me that intelligent people are as often duped as another person of lesser intelligence when it comes to God. What proof could one possibly have for God's existence? None -- and this I'm sure you will agree with me, but you probably don't consider this fact "relevant".
What is the belief in God, if not the cowardly submission that we are too weak-minded to believe in and act upon literal truths only. Far be it from you to insist on such a truth
The truth is, we don't know how the world as-it-is got created -- and there's no way to ever really know. So I put God, aliens, and mystical tides of cosmic mojo in the same category of hypotheses with no ground of proof.
The determining factor is not how SMART you are -- but how HONEST!
http://www.theabsolute.net